Skip to main content
  • 1808 Accesses

Abstract

Seismic instrument will not always work perfectly and even new instruments might have faults. It is therefore important to be able to test the instruments. This includes checking and/or determining the response of the instruments, since knowledge of the correct response is essential for analyzing the data. Seismic equipment can be complicated so not everything can be checked, however simple tests will often be sufficient in most cases. The instruments needed for most tests are one or several of the following: a multimeter, an oscilloscope, a signal generator and a recorder.

Sensors: For passive sensors like short period seismometers, the following parameters can be determined: Free period, damping, generator constant and coil resistance. With these parameters the characteristics of the sensor is completely known and the response function can be calculated. For active sensors there will be no coil resistance. Many sensors also have a calibration input so the response function can be measured directly inputting a signal, either from a signal generator or in the form of a calibration pulse and recording the output with a recorder. An alternative method to get the generator constant and the response function is to use a shaking table. In that case the ground input is absolutely known and the response function is directly related to the output. However, shaking tables are not common. An alternative is to use the shaking of the ground as input and measure the output from a known and an unknown sensor and compare. A force balanced accelerometer can be checked for static parameters using the gravitational field and just incline the sensor.

Digitizer and/or recorder: The frequency response can be measured with a signal generator as input and just recording the signal. The sensitivity will then also be calculated from the known input and the maximum input is found by increasing the input voltage until clipping occurs.

Noise in instruments: The instruments always generate noise and ideally it should be smaller than the signal noise. This is often the case for the best digitizers but sensors will always have noise that limits its usefulness, particularly at low frequencies. Measuring the self noise of an instrument is therefore an important task. For digitizers, the simplest test is to short the input and measure how much noise is recorded. For sensors, a similar test might be to lock the sensor, if possible, and then observe the noise. A very popular approach is the coherency method. Under the assumption that two sensors or digitizers have identical response, the output from the two instruments recording the same input signal will differ only in the instrumental self noise. One then determines the coherence between the two records and assumes that the coherent signal is the seismic signal and the incoherent signal is instrumental noise. With three instruments, the response does not have to be known.

Several practical examples of testing and calibration are given.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Asten MW (1977) Theory and practice of geophone calibration in situ using a modified step method. IEEE Trans Geosci Electron GE-15:208–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger J, Agnew DC, Parker RL, Farrell WE (1979) Seismic system calibration: 2. Cross-spectral calibration using random binary signals. Bull Seismol Soc Am 69:271–288

    Google Scholar 

  • Bormann P (ed) (2002) IASPEI New manual of seismological observatory practice (NMSOP). Geo Forchungs Zentrum, Potsdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Bormann P (ed) (2012) New Manual of Seismological Observatory Practice (NMSOP-2), IASPEI, GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, Potsdam; nmsop.gfz-potsdam.de

    Google Scholar 

  • Holcomb GL (1989) A direct method for calculating instrument noise levels in side-by-side seismometer evaluations. Open-file Report 89-214, U. S. Geol. Survey, Alburquerque, New Mexico

    Google Scholar 

  • Holcomb GL (1990) A numerical study of some potential sources of error in side-by-side seismometer evaluations. Open-file Report 90-406, U. S. Geol. Survey, Alburquerque, New Mexico

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutt CR (1990) Standards for seismometer testing—a progress report. U.S. Geological Survey, Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory, Albuquerque

    Google Scholar 

  • Ljung L (1999) System identification: theory for the user, Second edn. Prentice Hall PTR, Englewood Cliffs, 609 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • MacArthur A (1985) Geophone frequency calibration and laser verification. Geophysics 50:49–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacWilliams FJ, Sloan NJ (1976) Pseudo-random sequences and arrays. Proc IEEE 64:1715–1729

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitronovas W, Wielandt E (1975) High-precision phase calibration of long period electromagnetic seismographs. Bull Seismol Soc Am 60:411–424

    Google Scholar 

  • Pavlis GL, Vernon FL (1994) Calibration of seismometers using ground noise. Bull Seismol Soc Am 84:1243–1255

    Google Scholar 

  • Ringler AT, Hutt CR (2010) Self-noise models of seismic instruments. Seismol Res Lett 81:972–983

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherbaum F (2007) Of poles and zeros, fundamentals of digital seismology, revised second edn. Springer, Dordrecht, 271 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Sleeman R, van Wettum A, Trampert J (2006) Three-channel correlation analysis: a new technique to measure instrumental noise of digitizers and seismic sensors. Bull Seismol Soc Am 96:258–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steck L, Prothero WA (1989) Seismic calibration using the simplex algorithm. Bull Seismol Soc Am 79:1618–1628

    Google Scholar 

  • Willmore PL (ed) (1979) Manual of seismological observatory practice, Report SE-20, World Data Center A for Solid Earth Geophysics, US Dep. of Commerce, NOAA. Boulder, Colorado

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Havskov, J., Alguacil, G. (2016). Calibration and Testing. In: Instrumentation in Earthquake Seismology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21314-9_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics